Le 10/10/14 00:02, Stefan Seelmann a écrit :
> Two thoughts inline...
>
> On 10/09/2014 11:03 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
>> Alas, we are pulling this 1.0.0-M23 revision from a transitiv dependency
>> from apacheds-2.0.0-M17, which still depends on this broken revision. At
>> this point, we *have* to get apacheDS 2.0.0-M18 released, otherwise we
>> are blocked on Studio because of this wrong API version :/
> Would apacheds-2.0.0-M17 work with api-1.0.0-M24? In that case it should
> be possible to force the newer version somehow, isn't it?
The version is deduced by tycho. It's probably a better idea to use the
apacheDS SNAPSHOT at this point...
>
>> Ok, that is not all black and white. I have made a lot of progress in my
>> understanding on the Tycho process, and at this point, I wonder if it
>> would not be a good idea to review the API OSGified poms, and to start
>> doing the same work on ApacheDS and the other modules...
> That makes totally sense. And I wonder if there is some kind of test or
> verification that the generated OSGi bundle (especially the MANIFEST.MF)
> is valid, that there are no split packages, etc.?
Not that I know of. I'll check with a few people I know and who are more
deeply involved in OSGi.
I'm currently working on the LDAP API pom to expose the imported and
exported package explicitely, instead of expecting the felix plugin to
deduce the imported packages from the sources. This is a bit painful,
but that allows us to enforce the versions used for each of the imported
packages. More to come here...